Trends in the Use of Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support in the United States – An Analysis of the 2012 – 2015 National Inpatient Sample

Impact of right ventricular dysfunction on outcomes in patients requiring intra-aortic balloon pump placement: A retrospective nationwide analysis (2016-2020)

Right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) continues to be a significant contributor to both mortality and morbidity, posing a significant challenge in the management of patients undergoing evaluation for mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Currently, there is a paucity of data regarding outcomes in this subset of patients. We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample database (NIS) to identify adult hospitalizations who underwent intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) placement with or without co-existence of RVD. Multivariate logistic regression, and linear regression analyses were used to compare outcomes, and adjust for possible confounders. Out of 126,985 hospitalizations who underwent IABP placement, 1,475 (1.2%) had RVD. Patients with RVD who received an IABP had higher adjusted odds of inpatient mortality (Adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7-3.2, p<0.001) than those without co-existing RVD. Hospitalized patients who underwent IABP placement with RVD had higher adjusted odds of worse hospitalization outcomes in general. Conducting additional prospective studies and clinical trials with an emphasis on further subcategorization of patients with RVD is crucial for determining optimal management strategies for these patients.

Dynamic load modulation predicts right heart tolerance of left ventricular cardiovascular assist in a porcine model of cardiogenic shock

Ventricular assist devices (VADs) offer mechanical support for patients with cardiogenic shock by unloading the impaired ventricle and increasing cardiac outflow and subsequent tissue perfusion. Their ability to adjust ventricular assistance allows for rapid and safe dynamic changes in cardiac load, which can be used with direct measures of chamber pressures to quantify cardiac pathophysiologic state, predict response to interventions, and unmask vulnerabilities such as limitations of left-sided support efficacy due to intolerance of the right heart. We defined hemodynamic metrics in five pigs with dynamic peripheral transvalvular VAD (pVAD) support to the left ventricle. Metrics were obtained across a spectrum of disease states, including left ventricular ischemia induced by titrated microembolization of a coronary artery and right ventricular strain induced by titrated microembolization of the pulmonary arteries. A sweep of different pVAD speeds confirmed mechanisms of right heart decompensation after left-sided support and revealed intolerance. In contrast to the systemic circulation, pulmonary vascular compliance dominated in the right heart and defined the ability of the right heart to adapt to left-sided pVAD unloading. We developed a clinically accessible metric to measure pulmonary vascular compliance at different pVAD speeds that could predict right heart efficiency and tolerance to left-sided pVAD support. Findings in swine were validated with retrospective hemodynamic data from eight patients on pVAD support. This methodology and metric could be used to track right heart tolerance, predict decompensation before right heart failure, and guide titration of device speed and the need for biventricular support.

Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock Interventional Approach to Management in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories

Despite advances in early reperfusion and a technologic renaissance in the space of Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS), Cardiogenic Shock (CS) remains the leading cause of in-hospital mortality following Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI). Given the challenges inherent to conducting adequately powered randomized controlled trials in this time-sensitive, hemodynamically complex, and highly lethal syndrome, treatment recommendations have been derived from AMI patients without shock. In this review, we aimed to (1) examine the pathophysiology and the new classification system for CS; (2) provide a comprehensive, evidence-based review for best practices for interventional management of AMI-CS in the cardiac catheterization laboratory; and (3) highlight the concept of how frailty and geriatric syndromes can be integrated into the decision process and where medical futility lies in the spectrum of AMI-CS care. Management strategies in the cardiac catheterization laboratory for CS include optimal vascular access, periprocedural antithrombotic therapy, culprit lesion versus multi-vessel revascularization, selective utilization of hemodynamic MCS tailored to individual shock hemometabolic profiles, and management of cardiac arrest. Efforts to advance clinical evidence for patients with CS should be concentrated on (1) the coordination of multi-center registries; (2) development of pragmatic clinical trials designed to evaluate innovative therapies; (3) establishment of multidisciplinary care models that will inform quality care and improve clinical outcomes.

Extracorporeal Life Support for Cardiac Arrest and Cardiogenic Shock

The rising incidence and recognition of cardiogenic shock has led to an increase in the use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). As clinical experience with this therapy has increased, there has also been a rapid growth in the body of observational and randomized data describing the clinical and logistical considerations required to institute a VA-ECMO program with successful clinical outcomes. The aim of this review is to summarize this contemporary data in the context of four key themes that pertain to VA-ECMO programs: the principles of patient selection; basic hemodynamic and technical principles underlying VA-ECMO; contraindications to VA-ECMO therapy; and common complications and intensive care considerations that are encountered in the setting of VA-ECMO therapy.

Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices: Management and Prevention of Vascular Complications

The use of mechanical circulatory support devices has seen a dramatic rise over the last few years owing to their increased use not only in acute circulatory collapse but also their prophylactic use in high-risk procedures. These devices continue to have their overall benefits marginalized due to the relatively high rates of complications. Vascular complications are the most common and are associated with increased risk of mortality in these patients. Preventive measures at each stage of procedure, frequent monitoring and assessment to recognize early signs of deterioration are the best ways to mitigate the effects of vascular complications.

The Rise of Endovascular Mechanical Circulatory Support Use for Cardiogenic Shock and High Risk Coronary Intervention: Considerations and Challenges

Introduction: Cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction and decompensated advanced heart failure remains a source of significant morbidity and mortality. Endovascular mechanical circulatory support devices including intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (Impella and Tandemheart pumps), and veno-arterial extracorporeal oxygenation (VA-ECMO) are utilized for a broadening range of indications.Areas covered: This narrative review explores the specific devices, their distinctive hemodynamic profiles, and practical considerations. Furthermore, reviewed are the trials evaluating device outcomes which have generated significant controversy within the field of heart failure and shock. New applications and future directions are discussed.Expert opinion: Use of endovascular mechanical circulatory support has increased over the last decade, though evidence supporting their use is lacking. Development of large-scale prospective registries and clinical classification systems will facilitate patient enrollment and inform trial design. Furthermore, expansion of indications for these devices is revolutionizing how the field of heart failure and cardiogenic shock thinks about hemodynamic support. The ability to tailor therapy to a patient's specific hemodynamic profile appears to be the future of cardiogenic shock management.